evaluation of a novel particle based assay for detection of autoantibodies in idiopathic inflammatory myopathies

Abstract Background Myositis specific antibodies (MSA) represent not only important diagnostic tools for idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIM), but also help to stratify patients into subsets with particular clinical features, treatment responses, and disease outcome. Consequently, standardization of MSA is of high importance. Although many laboratories rely on protein immunoprecipitation (IP) for the detection of MSA, IP standardization is challenging and therefore reliable alternatives are mandatory. Recently, we identified significant variation between IP and line immunoassay (LIA) for the detection of MSA and myositis associated antibodies. In this study we aimed to compare the results from our previous study to the results obtained with a novel fully automated particle-based technology for the detection of MSA and MAA. Methods A total of 54 sera from patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathy (IIM) were tested using three methods: IP, LIA (Euroimmun, Germany) and a novel particle-based multi-analyte technology (PMAT, Inova Diagnostics, US, research use only). The analysis focused on antibodies to EJ, SRP, Jo-1, NXP-2, MDA5, TIF1-γ, and Mi-2. Results Significant variations were observed among all methods. Overall, the novel PMAT assays showed slightly better correlation with IP, but the kappa agreement was strongly dependent on the antibody tested. When the results obtained from IP were used as reference for receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, good discrimination and a high area under the curve (AUC) value were found for PMAT (AUC = 0.83, 95% confidence interval, CI 0.70-0.95) which was significantly higher (p = .0332) than the LIA method (AUC = 0.70, 95% CI 0.56–0.84). Conclusion The novel PMAT used to detect a spectrum of MSA in IIM represents a potential alternative to IP and other diagnostic assays. Additional studies based on larger cohorts are needed to fully assess the performance of the novel PMAT system for the detection of autoantibodies in myositis

Highlights on novel technologies for the detection of antibodies to Ro60, Ro52, and SS-B

Objective. We aimed to compare a chemiluminescent immunoassay (CIA, QUANTA Flash) on BIO-FLASH with a multiplex flow immunoassay (MFI) on BioPlex 2200 for the detection of antibodies to Ro60, Ro52, and SS-B. Methods. The study included 241 samples, from patients suffering from systemic autoimmune diseases (n = 108) as well as disease controls (n = 133). All samples were tested for anti-Ro52, anti-Ro60, and anti-SS-B (La) antibodies on QUANTA Flash (INOVA Diagnostics, San Diego, USA) and BioPlex 2200 (Bio-Rad Laboratories Inc., Hercules, USA). Discrepant samples were tested by two independent methods: BlueDot/ANA and QUANTRIX Microarray (both D-tek, Belgium). Results. The overall qualitative agreements were 95.4% (95% confidence interval, CI 92.0-97.7%) for anti-Ro52, 98.8% (95% CI 96.4-99.7%) for anti-Ro60, and 91.7% (95% CI 87.5-94.9%) for anti-SS-B antibodies. There were 34 discrepant samples among all assays (20 anti-SS-B, 11 anti-Ro52, 3 anti-Ro60). 30/33 of retested samples (by D-tek dot blot) agreed with the QUANTA Flash results. Similar findings were obtained with QUANTRIX Microarray kit. Conclusion. QUANTA Flash and BioPlex 2200 show good qualitative agreement. The clinical performances were similar for anti-Ro52 and anti-Ro60 autoantibodies while differences were observed for anti-SS-B (La) antibodies

Clinical comparison of QUANTA flash dsDNA chemiluminescent immunoassay with four current assays for the detection of anti-dsDNA autoantibodies

Introduction. The objective of the present study was to compare QUANTA Flash dsDNA, a chemiluminescent immunoassay (CIA) on the BIO-FLASH, a rapid-response chemiluminescent analyzer, to three other anti-dsDNA antibody assays and to Crithidia luciliae indirect immunofluorescence test (CLIFT). Methods. In the first part of the study, 161 samples, 61 from patients suffering from systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and 100 from a disease control group, were tested by QUANTA Flash dsDNA CIA, QUANTA Lite dsDNA SC ELISA, BioPlex 2200 multiplex flow immunoassay (MFI), ImmuLisa dsDNA ELISA, and NOVA Lite CLIFT. A second cohort of 69 SLE patients was then tested by QUANTA Flash dsDNA and CLIFT to expand the study. Results. The overall qualitative agreements varied between 77.0% (NOVA Lite CLIFT versus QUANTA Lite) and 89.4% (ImmuLisa versus NOVA Lite CLIFT). The clinical sensitivities for the anti-dsDNA antibody tests varied from 8.2% (NOVA Lite CLIFT) to 54.1% (QUANTA Lite), while the clinical specificities varied from 88.0% (BioPlex 2200) to 100.0% (NOVA Lite CLIFT). Good correlation was found between QUANTA Flash dsDNA and NOVA Lite CLIFT. Conclusion. Significant variations among dsDNA methods were observed. QUANTA Flash dsDNA provides a good combination of sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of SLE and good agreement to CLIFT

PR3-ANCA: A promising biomarker for the differentiation of ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease

status: publishe

Evaluation of a novel extended automated particle-based multi-analyte assay for the detection of autoantibodies in the diagnosis of primary biliary cholangitis.

Background Anti-mitochondrial autoantibodies (AMA) detected by indirect immunofluorescence (IIF) on rodent tissues are the diagnostic marker of primary biliary cholangitis (PBC). However, up to 15% of patients with PBC are AMA-negative by IIF. In the effort to close the serological gap and improve the diagnostic sensitivity of PBC testing, recently, novel autoantibodies specific for PBC, such as kelch-like 12 (KLHL12, KLp epitope) and hexokinase 1 (HK1) have been described. In this study, we evaluated the autoantibody profile in a large cohort of PBC patients and in patients with other liver disease, including anti-HK1 and anti-KLp autoantibodies. Methods Sera of 194 PBC patients (126 AMA-IIF-positive and 68 AMA-IIF-negative) and 138 disease controls were tested for a panel of PBC-specific antibodies (MIT3, sp100, gp210, HK1, KLp) using a new automated particle-based multi-analyte technology (PMAT) assay on the Aptiva instrument (Inova). Results Selecting a cutoff yielding a specificity of >95% for all the markers, the sensitivity for anti-MIT3, anti-sp100, anti-gp210, anti-HK1 and anti-KLp in the PBC AMA-IIF-negative cohort was 20.6%, 16.2%, 23.5%, 22.0%, 17.6 and 13.2%, respectively. Six out of the 68 (8.8%) AMA-IIF negative sera were positive for anti-HK1 or anti-KLp alone. Using these new markers in addition to anti-MIT3, anti-sp100 and anti-gp210, the overall sensitivity in this cohort of AMA-IIF-negative patients increased from 53% to 61.8%, reducing the serological gap in AMA-negative PBC patients. Conclusions PBC antibody profiling, made possible by the new Aptiva-PMAT technology, allows recognition of a higher number of AMA-negative PBC patients than conventional immunoassays and may represent a useful tool to evaluate the prognostic significance of autoantibody association in PBC patients